Friday 26th of April 2024
Home » Blogs » Gus Leonisky's blog

the dark prince from denmark...

lomborg

Bjørn Lomborg is a well-known personality in the environmental debate. He is the author of several books which, due to their copious lists of notes and references, appear very technical and scientific and therefore trustworthy. Unfortunately, those reading his books or listening to his lectures or seeing his film are rarely aware that the facts and statements presented by Lomborg are often not reliable.


     When experts in the fields covered by Lomborg check his texts, they most often find that the evidence has been distorted. Danish biologist Kåre Fog has systematically over many years checked Lomborg´s texts against his sources and references and against other scientific literature. His conclusion is that Lomborg´s texts are systematically manipulated to fit a certain agenda.


     The web site Lomborg-errors  has been established to document this claim. It gathers and publishes errors found in Bjørn Lomborg´s books, especially  "The Skeptical Environmentalist" (2001) and Cool it! (2007).


     In addition, it gives information on cases and activities related to Bjørn Lomborg, attempts to describe his methods, and points out cases where the claims about Lomborg´s dishonesty seem to hold true.


     From January 2008, the page also comments on errors made by Al Gore, to allow a comparison where the two persons are judged by the same standards.
    The web site is set up by, written by and hosted by Kåre Fog.


Why is it essential to point out the errors?


   First, because in the handling of errors, Lomborg does not act like most persons would do. A normal person would apologize or be ashamed if concrete, factual errors or misunderstandings were pointed out - and would correct the errors at the first opportunity given. Lomborg does not do that.  For example, when  The Skeptical Environmentalist was heavily  criticized in a review  in Nature, Lomborg´s reaction was: "If I really am so wrong, why don´t you just document that?" - and then, when this was documented, he ignored the facts. Read more about Lomborg´s reaction to criticism here.


    Second, because you cannot evaluate Lomborg´s books just by reading them and thinking of what you read. For every piece of information in the books, you have to check if it is true and if the presentation is balanced. If the concrete information given by Lomborg is correct and balanced, then it follows that his main conclusions are also correct. But if the information is flawed, then the main conclusions are biased or wrong. Therefore, in principle, you can only evaluate the books after having checked all footnotes, read all references, and checked alternative sources. This will be a huge task for any reader, but when the errors are described and presented in one place - this web site - then the task becomes manageable.


   Third, because the errors seem not to be inadvertent, but to follow a general pattern, they give a bias in a certain direction, probably an intended bias. If the errors remain uncommented, the readers of Lomborg´s books will be misled in this distinct direction . There are many examples where the misleading seems to be deliberate, which indicates that Lomborg is dishonest and covers up a hidden agenda. If this is so, then this has consequences for the understanding of  Lomborg´s intentions. The question whether the misleading is deliberate is discussed in more detail here. 

 

http://www.lomborg-errors.dk/

an insult to Australia’s scientific community...

The Australian Government today announced they would contribute $4m for Danish climate contrarian Bjorn Lomborg to establish a new “consensus centre” at the University of Western Australia.

 

In the face of deep cuts to the CSIRO and other scientific research organisations, it's an insult to Australia’s scientific community.

As the Climate Commission, we were abolished by the Abbott Government in 2013 on the basis that our $1.5 million annual operating costs were too expensive. We relaunched as the Climate Council after thousands of Australians chipped in to the nation’s biggest crowd-funding campaign - remember this video?

read more: http://www.climatecouncil.org.au/a-4-million-dollar-insult-to-the-scientific-community

another lie by christopher pyne...

 

A senior academic from the University of Western Australia (UWA) has confirmed the Abbott Government originally approached the university to set up a policy centre directed by controversial figure Bjorn Lomborg.

Dr Lomborg is a controversial figure in the scientific world, having attracted controversy in the past for suggesting the dangers of climate change are overstated and that alleviating poverty is a greater priority.

The statements made to Lateline contradict claims made by Education Minister Christopher Pyne that the proposal for an Australian Consensus Centre was made by the university and Dr Lomborg, not the Government.

"The Federal Government approached the university," Paul Johnson Vice Chancellor of UWA said.

"It (the Government) said: 'Would the university be interested in considering setting up a centre to study long-term development goals both global and Australia?'"

Professor Johnson said it was correct that thus far the entirety of funding for the Australian Consensus Centre had come from the Government, a pledge of $4 million over four years.

The Government has cut back on other scientific research across the country.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-23/uwa-academic-contradicts-pyne-on-policy-centre/6413984

 

Yep... "not doing anything about CO2 will help those who have already been devastated by Cyclone Pam"... That's Lomborg silly view.

Gus: We need to wean ourselves away from fossil fuels... URGENTLY.

 

pyne AND turdy abbott should resign...

Prime Minister Tony Abbott's office drove the push to provide government funding for "sceptical environmentalist" Bjorn Lomborg's climate think tank, not Education Minister Christopher Pyne.

Mr Pyne has faced calls to resign over the decision to hand $4 million in funding to establish Dr Lomborg's Copenhagen Consensus Centre methodology at the University of Western Australia (UWA) business school.

read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/prime-minister-tony-abbotts-office-the-origin-for-controversial-bjorn-lomborg-centre-decision-20150423-1mrha2.html

not happy academics...

 

 

Academics at the University of Western Australia have demanded its hierarchy explain how "sceptical environmentalist" Bjorn Lomborg was appointed as an adjunct professor for a new "consensus centre", questioning whether the Danish researcher hand-picked by Prime Minister Tony Abbott has the proper qualifications.  

On the day Fairfax Media revealed that the idea for the centre - which comes as a result of a $4 million grant from the federal government - originated in the Prime Minister's Office, academics stated their concern that the new centre has tarnished their reputations.

In a letter to David Harrison, UWA' s head of corporate and government affairs, obtained by Fairfax Media, the head of the School of Animal Biology Sarah Dunlop said one international research fellow is already set to transfer their fellowship to another institution in protest. 

read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/creation-of-tony-abbottbacked-lomborg-consensus-centre-has-tarnished-our-reputations-say-academics-20150423-1mry7n.html

 

 

One must say here that the way denialism is peddled is frightening:

First, there are the sheer DENIALISTS.

Second, come the DOUBTERS.

Third, there are those, like LOMBORD, who appear to accept global warming but do everything to disprove it by deceit, using unscientific "data" by the truck load. They are the DECEIVERS.

Fourth, there are those who accept climate change but humans are not responsible for it: the NOT-MY-FAULTERS

Fifth, there are those who accept global warming but have decided nothing can be done or nothing should be done about it: the TOO-LATE MOBSTERS

Then there those who don't care: the I-DON'T GIVE A SHITTERS...

 

Overall, the theme and the counterpoints of denial are orchestrated to suit pollies like Turdy Abbott himself who without flinching will say: "coal is good for humanity", so they can favour their mates — the rich — while condemning the surface of this planet to more destruction.